- Re: Treo 600

- Re Ashley Burrows, Nokia 9500 (syncing Messaging with Outlook)

- 9500, Freeware (and shareware)

- Re. Freeware (and shareware)

- For Ashley : 9500

- Re: Communicator 9500 and Other Psion Wanna-be's

Date: 10 Apr 2005 09:36:16 +0700
From: Mike Dyer <address truncated>
Subject: Re: Treo 600

Reply to: Jim Watson-Gove <address truncated>

> Subject: Re: Treo 600  (and oops!!!)
>
> Mike Dyer
>
> <<Documents to Go is
> astonishingly more powerful than UIQ Quickoffice and keeps an up to date> copy automatically on my pc.>>
>
> I'm having a similar experience with Documents To Go on my new Tungsten C> (received it yesterday).   Wordsmith was my favorite word processor until> really giving DtoG a good try this time around.
>
> I am loading up Snappermail for my EMail app as I have no need to
> synchronize email and found Snappermail a powerful app the last time I was> doing email on my now defunct Treo and Dana.
>
> Love the Tungsten C.  The high powered processor and 64 megs of memorymake
> all the difference.  The thumb board is even better than the Treo's (which> is also excellent), and the portable keyboard is really portable (folds up> into a very small package) and will work well for the heavier text
> jobs.  The screen is great.
>
> There promises to be life after Psion after all.
>

Hi Jim,

it's also nice to be able to delete an email from inbox, but to be able tokeep a copy on the server for my pc to pick up but it remains invisible tothe Treo 600 once deleted. My Revo+ could do this but my SE p800 could not.

I've written some really long emails now with the Treos keyboard and whilstI'd never advocate it as a replacement for a Psion (Buy a 9500). If you wanta decent phone/diary/microsoft office document editor/ I would stronglyrecommend the Treo with Documents To Go.

The keys do look bigger on the Tungsten C, but despite initial scepticismand with a little practise I can now 'type' on the Treo as fast as I everdid with the Revo+ with two thumbs. It is far, far, faster than any on boarddata entry method on the SE p800.

Best Wishes,
Mike Dyer.

Date: 10 Apr 2005 10:31:19 +0700
From: Chris Fox <address truncated>
Subject: Re Ashley Burrows, Nokia 9500 (syncing Messaging with Outlook)

Hi all, from a digestive who's been mostly lurking for over five years

I've been slowly migrating from my 5mx to my Nokia 9500 since Christmas and like Ashley, I was a little disappointed with the apparent loss of ability to sync the draft and sent folders to Outlook (why omit it?!).  I've found the following to be a good workaround at least for the sent folder:

When writing an email on the 9500, in the BCC field put your own email address before sending the Email.  When you later open Outlook on your PC the email will appear exactly as if you'd sent it from Outlook; all you have to do is move it from your inbox to the sent items folder.

I hope this helps

Chris Fox
Cheshire
UK

Date: 10 Apr 2005 11:00:59 +0700
From: Chris S Handley
Subject: 9500, Freeware (and shareware)

Subject: 9500 (was Re: Fujitsu-Siemens LOOX 720)
On  8 Apr 2005, Alan Morris wrote:
> As reported there is no touch screen.  But the old DOS method
> of a row of function keys below the screen, has been changed
> to 4 (3?) blank keys (not square pads as on k'brd) to the
> right of the screen.  A good idea, but not quite right, yet.

It's called the Command Button Array, or CBA for short, and by most reports it works *very* well once you've been using it for a while - often having just the right command when you want it.  It uses 4 buttons, although the bottom one is typically used to escape, cancel, or close.

Without wishing to repeat my previous post, the CBA is intended to replace the Psion's toolbar & the buttons used by dialogs.


> I can't understand why Nokia have crippled the device by omitting
> a touch screen, as all PDA screens and many new GPS receivers have
> touch screens.

I think that you go WAY to far when you say it is "crippled"!  Certainly I think it would be nice to have in some situations, but if you use the device like Nokia intended (which may take a little getting used to) then I think there's a fair bet you'll be happy with it most of the time...

Even with my Psions I often use the cursor keys to navigate.


> They also mentioned the 9500 and said that the only
> difference was an added camera.

Not quite, as the 9500 also has:  WiFi, better battery life, and a screen hinge which prevents it from lying flat (180 degrees).  There are probably some other minor differences which I forgot.


> Too many changes to the built-in apps for my liking.  Why
> change a good thing that works for something different.

Errr, it is pretty similar to the old Nokia 9200, upon which it is based.  I think you've gotten Psion & Nokia mixed up ;-) .

Bear in mind that it is *not* using the Eikon GUI (running on EPOC), but rather Nokia's own Series 80 GUI (running on Symbian).  And Series 80 was based on a Symbian GUI prototype (Crystal??).

To use Eikon, not only would Nokia have to pay Psion for it (I think), but they'd have to adapt it to run on Symbian OS, and then further adapt it to run on their very differently designed hardware and for a different target market.

Regards,
Chris Handley

Visit the web page email.cshandley.co.uk for my address


P.S. I do not own a Nokia 9500, nor any other Communicator.

============

Subject: Freeware (and shareware)
Phil Aypee wrote:
> Ian (Chapple), I still disagree.

While being a fellow Freepoc author, I still have disagree with Ian - although not specifically for the legal reasons which you give.


> And fairness *is* implied simply by releasing the software.

I'd tend to agree with this - in my terms, I would say that any author who releases something (free or not) is doing so with some implied obligations.  The kind of obligations depends on how he released it.  When I attempted to write-down these implicit obligations, I came up with this:

* Commercial software; the author is earning a living from his software being sold, so he is obligated to fix bugs and add features requested by users.

* Shareware; the author is earning some extra money (on top of his main job) from selling his own software, so he is obligated to fix bugs, and is expected (but not required) to add requested features.

* Freeware; the author gains no money, but by making his software publically available he is implying that he will provide limited support - he is obligated to fix bugs, but is not expected to add requested features (however he may do so).

* Open Source; the author is providing complete public access to his software, thereby releasing him from any implied support issues - he is expected (but not required) to fix bugs, but is not expected to add requested features (however he may do so).


This is an except from the "Theory of author's responsibility" section which can be found near the end of the Help file for both FastBackup & TubeRoute.

I should also mention that I expect that some people will disagree with my list of implied obligations.  It was only ever meant to be a starting point for discussion, although I haven't ever recieved any comments (positive or negative) about it...


> To give a more pertinent example, Gavin Lewarne released
> EpocDos as freeware that required registration. Gavin was
> subsequently hospitalised for a time. When he was
> sufficiently recovered he rewrote the program *without* a
> registration requirement

> He realised that his generosity had been undermined by his
> absence.

Gavin obviously holds a similar opinion to me :-)


Changing the topic, your signature was:

> "Minimise your therbligs until it becomes automatic;
> this doubles your effective lifetime -
>
> and thereby gives time to enjoy
> butterflies and kittens and rainbows."

While I agree with the sentiment, I dislike the creation of meaningless units.  e.g. There is no obvious way to numerically measure "therbligs", whereas I can easily measure Miles or Kilograms.

IMHO, it would be much better to simply say that one should try to maximise your efficiency.  (The more efficient you are at a task, the less time it takes.)  Halve the time you take to do most tasks, and you double your effective lifetime :-)

Regards,
Chris Handley

Visit the web page email.cshandley.co.uk for my address

Date: 10 Apr 2005 11:19:41 +0700
From: ian chapple <address truncated>
Subject: Re. Freeware (and shareware)

Phil,

I still disagree with you. The Concise Oxford Dictionary definition of "unfair" is:

1. not equitable or honest,

2. not impartial or according to the rules.

Whatever you think about Ken, and whatever some other software developer has chosen to do regarding his own software, neither of the above definitions apply in this case.

If a freeware developer makes a piece of software freely available, and then sometime later chooses not to, this is not unfair. Freeware is released and made available purely at the discretion of the author; there is no implied fairness, no contract is entered into, and there is no financial gain for the author. As soon as money is paid for a piece of software, the purchaser has the right to expect a certain amount of support; this is clearly not the case with freeware.

As a freeware author myself, I *choose* to take responsibility for my software, to respond to queries as and when they arise, and to try to fix bugs or make requested improvements when it is feasible to do so. However, I am not *obliged* to do this, and if I did choose not to, this would not be unfair. It would possibly make me a bad freeware author, but it would not make me unfair.

>>It is neither moral nor legal (in the UK anyway) to give away goods of any kind that are faulty unless it is made clear that the goods *are* faulty. A free program/macro that won't work but is given as working is de facto faulty - and if it won't work because it can't be registered it is still faulty.<<

This argument is fallacious, because you obviously did not get the software directly from Ken. If you did, you could register it; if you didn't, then it is no longer Ken's responsibility.

>>And fairness *is* implied simply by releasing the software. In fact fairness is then *required*.<<

Sorry, I don't agree.

>>To give a more pertinent example, Gavin Lewarne released EpocDos as freeware that required registration. Gavin was subsequently hospitalised for a time. When he was sufficiently recovered he rewrote the program *without* a registration requirement (and it wasn't easy as he had lost the source code).

He realised that his generosity had been undermined by his absence. If someone relied on EpocDos but it subsequently failed because it was unregistered and he couldn't register it then it would be no more his fault than Gavin's. But the responsibility would have been Gavin's - and he would have been legally liable.<<

It is admirable that he chose to remove the need to register his program, but there is no way that he would ever have been legally liable in this case.

>>Now shareware is a different matter. If you can't register it then you can't buy a licence for it. So if the program stops working after the trial period that's tough. It wasn't free and you have no right to demand that the author accept payment and licence your copy. In fact the author can refuse you a licence but sell me one!<<

The same applies to freeware which requires registration; the author has the same discretion about whether to issue a registration code or not.

>>That's why it's usual for any software to include a disclaimer - "this software is not warranted good for any purpose whatsoever" or some such - which has a limited effect.<<

I make the same disclaimer in my own software, all of which is freeware. But until such a disclaimer is actually tested in court, I have no idea how much protection this gives me.

>>Bought software and shareware are covered by several laws and if it doesn't do "as it says on the tin" the vendor has, at least, to refund payment. Free software, especially where copyright is retained, is similarly covered but with different sanctions, specifically
if it causes damage when used reasonably.<<

Copyright on software is extremely hard to prove, and has rarely been tested in the courts. Merely stating that source code is copyrighted does not necessarily make it so. As yet, no-one knows how much the source code of a piece of copyrighted software has to be changed before the copyright no longer applies.

Even if an author feels, or is certain, that his "copyrighted" source code has been (mis)used by someone else, there is not necessarily much that he can do about it. A court case would be expensive and possibly inconclusive; if the "offence" occurred in another country, it would be even more difficult, if not impossible, to do anything about it.

The same problems occur with open source software; if someone chooses to use open source source code in a commercial product, it is not clear what the original author may do about it. These types of licences (GPL etc.) all rely on trust and good faith.

>>But fairness is still implied, actually required, simply by releasing the software.<<

This is your opinion; it is not mine. One possible interpretation of what you are saying would be that a freeware author may never stop supporting his software, as it would be "unfair" to a user who wanted a particular bug fixing or a new feature adding; this is clearly unreasonable.

Nothing you have said make me change my opinion. The situation where software is freely released, and then at a later date is no longer supported, does not qualify as unfair.

Cheers, Ian.

Date: 10 Apr 2005 19:26:00 +0700
From: Steve Litchfield <address truncated>
Subject: For Ashley : 9500

>I have a huge memory card MMC 1 Gig for only ?40 and have over 600megs of MP3's on it 20 CD's worth.

The HDS-3 stereo headset works really well - great quality of sound!

>A really simple flat database like the 5mx would be wonderful, Powerdata

YData. Run, don't walk. Great little program, from Yellow Computing.

>I must add with the recent discussion on batteries here, the 9500 is stunning.

Seconded, I just stick it on charge every few days for an hour and that's it. It's a real shock when switching back to one of my old Psions. My 5mx would go through a battery set just sitting in the draw for a couple of weeks... Or used to be, I should say  - currently selling the last one....

>Tom-tom city maps works, but it crashes if I try to zoom. Not a great problem as I now have a Tom-tom Go unit in the Car.

TomTom MOBILE 5 (beta arriving here this week) is the full GO software and more, all on your Nokia 9500. Really looking forward to trying this.

..........................
Steve Litchfield, 3-Lib, http://3lib.ukonline.co.uk/
Software and features for Psion/Symbian handhelds and smartphones
Also PocketInfo, useful files - http://3lib.ukonline.co.uk/pocketinfo Journalism: sub-editor and/or senior contributor to:
Palmtop User - http://www.palmtop.co.uk/
PDA Essentials - http://www.paragon.co.uk/mags/pdaessentials.html
PC Basics - http://www.paragon.co.uk/mags/pcbasics.html
Reviews editor, AllAboutSymbian - http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/

Date: 11 Apr 2005 16:00:05 +0700
From: Martin Maxwell <address truncated>
Subject: Re: Communicator 9500 and Other Psion Wanna-be's

From: Martin Maxwell <address truncated>
Subject: Re: Communicator 9500 and Other Psion Wanna-be's

Answer to Rolf Brunsting

>You're not going to get your Psion back for the simple reason that the only >company that designs and builds Psions is : Psion.

Not entirely true.

First, Psion has ceased to build Psions, as we know them, i.e. EPOC/Eikon based Psions. Meanwhile, Clove (www.clove.co.uk) is remanufacturing the Psion Series 5mx Pro, with improved screen and lasting screen-cable. So the only existing manufacturer of such Psions today is, in fact, not Psion.

Second, Psions, as we know them, consist of two obvious parts, hardware and software. The software of the Psions, as we know them, is very much - albeit in various shapes and forms - present in the Nokia Communicators from the 9210 to the 9500 and 9300. Many of the features which we associate with Psions - from simple key-combinations to complete applications - are indeed present in Nokia Communicators. So at least in parts, the Psions, as we know them, are present in the Communicators.

>Besides, talking about the 9500 Communicator as a "Psion Wanna-be" is
>rather silly as it's Nokia that created a completely new market segment
>when it launched the 9000 Communicator in 1996.<

Third, I am quite sure that roping in Psion users along with GEOS users was indeed in Nokia's market plans for the 9210. I think Nokia was putting quite some pressure on Psion at the time not to proceed with the Psion Communicator (codenamed "Thor") which was on the drawing table.

So I wouldn't dismiss these innuendos about this relation as 'silly'. I believe they're said in jest anyway.

cheers
Martin Maxwell
Singapore